keepreal

keepreal

Lives in United Kingdom Enfield, United Kingdom
Works as a Retired
Joined on Mar 24, 2007
About me:

Amateur with a passion for pictorial photography of more than fifty years.

Comments

Total: 154, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous5678Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Nikonworks: I read Thom Hogan's characterization of Fuji's move into a mirrorless niche:
" Minor bet made (by Fuji) by putting interchangeable primes on an updated X100 frame (upcoming X-Pro1)."

This suggests that we should not 'bet' (buy) the new Fuji X system until they raise their 'bet' perhaps by getting their zoom lenes to market.

Why invest in a new system that was not that much of an investment for Fuji to enter in the first place?

Can't wait until a production review.

I think you raise an important point. The X-Pro1 and its sister models will remain in their infancy until there is a comprehensive range of lenses, they and the bodies have been on the market some time and we all know for sure whether they are top notch or only nearly.

I envy the guy who has the money that he can spend a fortune easily and early but despise him for his superficiality in not knowing what he is doing other than flashing his wealth around.

If I have to wait until the dust has settled and the new Fuji equipment is a stable and predictable proposition, then I would do the same even if I had the means to jump more quickly. I did just that, waiting until I bought the Nikon D300 so that I knew what I was doing, not merely jumping on the bandwagon.

I get the impression that for some the pleasure is in the equipment. I am interested only in pictures, the end results.

“Two things rob people of their peace of mind: work unfinished and work not yet begun" Alexander Solzhenitsyn

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2012 at 17:56 UTC
In reply to:

CharlesB58: Why mention a camera like this as a replacement for a FF dslr, much less any dslr? Why do some people not seem to get it that not every mirrorless camera is supposed to be a dslr replacement? To me it's an amusing (and sometimes annoying) aspect of the dslr/mirrorless "debate" that people keep saying "mirrorless can't do what my dslr can do..."

There are those of us who appreciate the "old school", 35mm rangefinder approach to photography. I would suggest people don't look a the X-Pro1 as a replacement for a dslr any more than people looked at the Leica M4 as a 35mm slr replacement during the film era.

The same goes for zooms. I'm sure they will come, but it's obvious Fuji is not trying to beat the competition "mano a mano" but rather is using the success of the X100 as a indicator of the niche they are wanting to fill.

I favour DSLRs but only because of the optical viewfinder precision and clarity, especially with zoom lenses. Nonetheless, I yearn for something at most half the weight and bulk. Both are an issue with my Nikon D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm and two additional, bigger and heavier zoom lenses. It is fine when out on a serious photo opportunity but less so when not, just wanting to lug the equipment along with you just in case of the unexpected.

In the early 1970s I lifted the latest Leica M to my eye in a shop just to satisfy my curiosity. It was way beyond my pocket. I turned the focusing ring and knew immediately when I had hit the spot without going past and coming back again even though I had never tried it before, the viewfinder optics were that good.

So, a mirrorless digital that has that precision and is affordable would demand some very serious thought. An X-Pro1 with the 15mm f/2.8 sounds like it might be just that and if there is a smaller nearly as good model, even better.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 13, 2012 at 17:43 UTC
On Fujifilm X-Pro1 preview (756 comments in total)

For some additional observations of mine about lenses that one might hope for with the X-Pro1 and that might make interesting reading for hard to please guys like me, please have a look at my comments at the DP Review preview at http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/10/FujifilmXPro1_Preview.

There also is a link from there to a superb quality digital image you can download and discover (if you already don't know) what the very best lenses and digital cameras can achieve.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 19:35 UTC as 160th comment
In reply to:

keepreal: At www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/feed there are three very detailed videos from Fuji. The first gives a 19 minute leisurely but highly informative account and the other two lower down that page "Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 - Hands-on Preview (1/2) and (2/2) possibly cover some more. (Not yet watched.)

Did you know that Fuji are behind many Hasselblad cameras and make some of the lenses? That says a lot.

A couple of days ago I said the X-Pro1 was too expensive as a second camera to a DSLR like my Nikon D300 plus 3 zoom lenses but now I am beginning to think in time I might even decide on it as the replacement. I love my D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm lens but when the Fuji 15mm f/2.8 comes out, perhaps later in 2012, I may have to reconsider. The bulk and the weight are far too great for my liking and a far more compact alternative which equals or surpasses it in quality has to be seriously considered. But I will not rush into it as there will be a huge loss selling what I already have.

The entry just above posted here in error and too late to edit out! Sorry.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 19:30 UTC
In reply to:

keepreal: At www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/feed there are three very detailed videos from Fuji. The first gives a 19 minute leisurely but highly informative account and the other two lower down that page "Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 - Hands-on Preview (1/2) and (2/2) possibly cover some more. (Not yet watched.)

Did you know that Fuji are behind many Hasselblad cameras and make some of the lenses? That says a lot.

A couple of days ago I said the X-Pro1 was too expensive as a second camera to a DSLR like my Nikon D300 plus 3 zoom lenses but now I am beginning to think in time I might even decide on it as the replacement. I love my D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm lens but when the Fuji 15mm f/2.8 comes out, perhaps later in 2012, I may have to reconsider. The bulk and the weight are far too great for my liking and a far more compact alternative which equals or surpasses it in quality has to be seriously considered. But I will not rush into it as there will be a huge loss selling what I already have.

For some additional observations of mine about lenses especially that might be of interest to hard to please guys like me, please have a look at my comment at the DP Review preview at http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01/10/FujifilmXPro1_Preview

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 18:00 UTC

Part I - It may not seem relevant, but go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasselblad_H3D#H3D_and_H3DII. Click on the image of the blond lady and download the full resolution (7,304 × 5,478 pixels) by clicking on the correct link below the large image. Examine it magnified and you will find it beautifully sharp with not a hint of digital artefacts which even the best of my lenses on my Nikon D300 cannot equal. The latter are very sharp but lack the wonderful smoothness just a little.

If the lenses of the X-Pro1 are as good as this, albeit allowing but only slightly for the fact that they are APS-C not Hasselblad H size, then the X-Pro1 system will be the cat's whiskers, possibly taking over the mantle from Leica digital cameras. It is such a pity that Leica lend their name to second rate optics in the true compact class. My son has one of them, the DMC-TZ6 which has a so-called Leica lens but is inferior to the lens on the 5mp Olympus C-5060 of earlier vintage by about four years.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 17:26 UTC as 10th comment

Part II - From what we already know, I would expect DP Review in due course to have its full review showing the X-Pro1 to be everything a top notch digital camera can and should be. From the 19 minute Fuji Guys video “Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 Part 1 - First Look” at www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/ its ergonomics seem to offer what almost every other digital camera fails to provide. I love the Q button’s functions which bypass the menu system and the ability to adjust all the key attributes without going down into either. I think a serious camera should be as simple and aesthetically pleasing to use as a top-notch film camera without stupid things like scene modes unless one wants to adjust something which film cameras just cannot address, ISO for example. The fact that almost every other digital camera fails miserably on this is a real catastrophy.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 17:26 UTC as 11th comment | 1 reply

Part III - For me, the key factor with the X-Pro1 will be the lenses and whether they follow the current least line of resistance by allowing substandard performance to be corrected by software. Such practice is fine for cameras that shoot jpegs which the user is unlikely to want to fine tune with software like Photoshop but not if you use RAW. It is all very well that usually the manufacturer provides a RAW converter which covers corrections including lens distortion but this forces you to use it. (It is a bit like putting Fuller’s earth in a car’s gearbox to make it function better.) I do not accept that limitation as I now use an HDR engine even for single shots. That is because in most respects Oloneo PhotoEngine gives superior results, usually far better than anything else does.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 17:26 UTC as 12th comment

At www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/feed there are three very detailed videos from Fuji. The first gives a 19 minute leisurely but highly informative account and the other two lower down that page "Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 - Hands-on Preview (1/2) and (2/2) possibly cover some more. (Not yet watched.)

Did you know that Fuji are behind many Hasselblad cameras and make some of the lenses? That says a lot.

A couple of days ago I said the X-Pro1 was too expensive as a second camera to a DSLR like my Nikon D300 plus 3 zoom lenses but now I am beginning to think in time I might even decide on it as the replacement. I love my D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm lens but when the Fuji 15mm f/2.8 comes out, perhaps later in 2012, I may have to reconsider. The bulk and the weight are far too great for my liking and a far more compact alternative which equals or surpasses it in quality has to be seriously considered. But I will not rush into it as there will be a huge loss selling what I already have.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 05:42 UTC as 13th comment | 3 replies

At www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/feed there are three very detailed videos from Fuji. The first gives a 19 minute leisurely but highly informative account and the other two lower down that page "Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 - Hands-on Preview (1/2) and (2/2) possibly cover some more. (Not yet watched.)

Did you know that Fuji are behind many Hasselblad cameras and make some of the lenses? That says a lot.

A couple of days ago I said the X-Pro1 was too expensive as a second camera to a DSLR like my Nikon D300 plus 3 zoom lenses but now I am beginning to think in time I might even decide on it as the replacement. I love my D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm lens but when the Fuji 15mm f/2.8 comes out, perhaps later in 2012, I may have to reconsider. The bulk and the weight are far too great for my liking and a far more compact alternative which equals or surpasses it in quality has to be seriously considered. But I will not rush into it as there will be a huge loss selling what I already have.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 05:41 UTC as 18th comment | 2 replies
On Fujifilm X-Pro1 preview (756 comments in total)

At www.youtube.com/user/fujiguys/feed there are three very detailed videos from Fuji. The first gives a 19 minute leisurely but highly informative account and the other two lower down that page "Fuji Guys - Fujifilm X-Pro1 - Hands-on Preview (1/2) and (2/2) possibly cover some more. (Not yet watched.)

Did you know that Fuji are behind many Hasselblad cameras and make some of the lenses? That says a lot.

A couple of days ago I said the X-Pro1 was too expensive as a second camera to a DSLR like my Nikon D300 plus 3 zoom lenses but now I am beginning to think in time I might even decide on it as the replacement. I love my D300 with the Sigma 12-24mm lens but when the Fuji 15mm f/2.8 comes out, perhaps later in 2012, I may have to reconsider. The bulk and the weight are far too great for my liking and a far more compact alternative which equals or surpasses it in quality has to be seriously considered. But I will not rush into it as there will be a huge loss selling what I already have.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 12, 2012 at 05:37 UTC as 170th comment | 3 replies

The X-Pro1 is far too expensive for a second camera but might be an excellent first choice for some.

Forget compacts. I think my choice of a second camera two years ago was inspired and still is. My first camera is the heavy Nikon D300 with three heavy zoom lenses. I was not obliged to get another Nikon but I eventually decided upon the Nikon D5000 plus the Nikkor 18-55mm VR. The lens is surprisingly good.

● Slightly heavier and bulkier than the best compacts
● Close to or = best dynamic range of entry level DSLRs/compacts
● No excessive distortion when shooting RAW
● Pretty accurate viewfinder
● No struggling to keep steady away from body as with many compacts
● Saved a bundle compared with everything else

It would be great to have a quality camera with a large sensor but slightly smaller than the X-Pro1 and ideally still with an OVF (no hybrid EVF) and a down to earth price. I am not sure it will ever happen, so another two years on and probably I still will be glad of my D5000.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 02:01 UTC as 67th comment
In reply to:

Lea5: It is the end, but there will be an new beginning.

It reminds me of another one big company, Francke & Heidecke who produced the Rolleiflex. They went out of business in 2009. Another company bought them and will produce new cameras in the future. I think with Kodak it will be the same. I guess the Company will be split, the filmline will completely die and the new owner will focus on competitive digital cameras.

Yes it is a great shame about the Rollei, the twin lens models were beautifil cameras. I could never understand why they lost their popularity even before digital took over. Holding a digital compact (even a prosumer one) away from the body and shooting like that is something I have no intention of ever contemplating and an EVF is a poor substitue for an optical finder. But the position pushed against the waist for a Rollei or a Hasselblad with the regular finder worked well in most situations.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2012 at 12:22 UTC
In reply to:

Jun2: I like film. Digital is more convenient. Kodak was a digital leader in sensor. But they have no clue how to design a good camera body. They should buy a camera company when they still had the lead in sensor. That's what happens when one can't innovate fast enough.

Their Retina range with the bellows up to the IIIc were beautiful cameras and I had one, so I think that saying they had no clue is way over the top.

Just like with cars the modern fashion seems to be to try and be as bulbous and ugly as possible, so may be Kodak had difficulty joining that dubious throng. There are still one or two exceptions to this of course but they hark back to a different era, when Kodak definitely was king.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2012 at 12:14 UTC

I think it is a bit harsh to dam Kodak even if there was an element of arrogance in their heyday. At its best Kodak was great and almost without peer in many aspects of photography and for a long, long time too.

It is not so unusual - look at Gevaert, Adox and Agfa who once made great films, papers and chemicals. Also, there are a lot of companies in photography who are still around but not what they used to be, like Zeiss, Linhof, Schneider, Meyer, Ilford...

Sooner or later it will happen to even the best of us - companies and people. Decline is inevitable, regrettably, and we should be a little sad rather than scathing.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 5, 2012 at 03:19 UTC as 33rd comment
On Challenge of Challenges 2011 Winner announced article (110 comments in total)

Congratulations to all the winners. The best are very good indeed, much better than I expected. I am sure the kingfisher did not drop the fish. They can jiggle their prey in their beaks with tremendous skill, just like Elroyie taking the picture.

The picture of the Great Nebula in Orion is beautiful and obviously took great skill. I must go there on my holidays. But my favourite of all those here is the one at Canyonlands, which I think is stunning. I would have given it first prize by a mile.

This is slightly annoying for me as I was on holiday last summer not so far away but regrettably I did not manage Canyonlands during my 3500 miles on the road in 22 days. I did get a few lovely sunset shot at the Grand Canyon, but the lighting in the picture here is quite beautiful and quite perfect.

The Yosemite shot is different in style but equally beautiful to those Ansel Adams took years ago. I went there in summer in the 1970s and it is not easy to get shots this good there. I didn’t!

Direct link | Posted on Jan 4, 2012 at 02:53 UTC as 52nd comment
On 10 Last-Minute Gift Ideas for Photographers article (41 comments in total)

This is about the most trashy article I have seen on DP Review ever. A much better present for Xmas would have been for it to include only serious stuff for serious people like it used to.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 21, 2011 at 10:46 UTC as 22nd comment | 3 replies
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: I do not believe any mirrorless camera is ideal for serious photography not even as a second camera. My ideal would at worst be no bigger than or heavier than a Leica M3 with a good range of compact, light weight lenses including a 12-24mm equivalent that is not severely distorted when you use RAW. Electronic viewfinders appear to suffer from problems in certain conditions, so I insist upon an optical one approaching Leica quality. In spite of my reservations about EVF the NEX-7 might have been of some interest but for the hugely inflated price.

The idea of holding a camera away from your body to peer at a LCD screen on the back obliterated by bright sunlight, compose the image properly, hold the camera steady with your arm or arms away from your body is a joke.

Micro-miniaturisation of electronic circuits has not led to compact DSLRs like it could, just large heavy models with many useless features unnecessary complexity and bloated prices. The only winners are the manufacturers.

PS. The Samsung does have some interesting lenses and I would have considered the NX200 with reservations because of the lack of viewfinder with the 16mm lens even though a fixed focal length. On my Nikon D300 I use my Sigma 12-24 99% of the time and I could have lived with that lens for landscape photography very happily. The saving in bulk would have been a benefit but the severe distortion and lack of edge sharpness killed that idea. Other lenses in their range are better but still not up to scratch. The reviews at http://www.photozone.de are revealing and very disappointing.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 18:41 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: I do not believe any mirrorless camera is ideal for serious photography not even as a second camera. My ideal would at worst be no bigger than or heavier than a Leica M3 with a good range of compact, light weight lenses including a 12-24mm equivalent that is not severely distorted when you use RAW. Electronic viewfinders appear to suffer from problems in certain conditions, so I insist upon an optical one approaching Leica quality. In spite of my reservations about EVF the NEX-7 might have been of some interest but for the hugely inflated price.

The idea of holding a camera away from your body to peer at a LCD screen on the back obliterated by bright sunlight, compose the image properly, hold the camera steady with your arm or arms away from your body is a joke.

Micro-miniaturisation of electronic circuits has not led to compact DSLRs like it could, just large heavy models with many useless features unnecessary complexity and bloated prices. The only winners are the manufacturers.

chrohrs - I like your humour and managed to resist taking the bait but only for a few hours...

Like Ansel Adams I had a plate camera a long time ago. You -knew exactly what the result was going to be like even before you tripped the shutter because you put such care into everything. I still try to do that today with digital and take very few shots for that reason. Of course, that is fine for landscape photography but ludicrous for action.

If and when EVF drawbacks are completely solved, like a noisy image in certain conditions, when the Sony NEX-7 price or equivalent comes down by at least 30% and when there is a high quality range of lightweight optics including a 12-24mm on APS-C or equivalent with no distinct distortion shooting RAW then I will be happy to abandon direct optical viewfinders and possibly even DSLRs. Mind you, if a replacement for the Samsung NX200 appears with a top notch EVF up to keepreal standards, I think I might like that better than the Sony.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 18:32 UTC
On Mirrorless Roundup 2011 article (429 comments in total)
In reply to:

keepreal: I do not believe any mirrorless camera is ideal for serious photography not even as a second camera. My ideal would at worst be no bigger than or heavier than a Leica M3 with a good range of compact, light weight lenses including a 12-24mm equivalent that is not severely distorted when you use RAW. Electronic viewfinders appear to suffer from problems in certain conditions, so I insist upon an optical one approaching Leica quality. In spite of my reservations about EVF the NEX-7 might have been of some interest but for the hugely inflated price.

The idea of holding a camera away from your body to peer at a LCD screen on the back obliterated by bright sunlight, compose the image properly, hold the camera steady with your arm or arms away from your body is a joke.

Micro-miniaturisation of electronic circuits has not led to compact DSLRs like it could, just large heavy models with many useless features unnecessary complexity and bloated prices. The only winners are the manufacturers.

Esa – Yes, skilled photographers can get good results even when the equipment they use is less than ideal. A camera is only as good as its user.

I agree that smaller cameras can be awkward for large hands especially when the weight is 1 kg or more with the lens attached. However, had a top quality DSLR been available about the size and considerably smaller weight of the prewar Leicas, and I see no good reason why not, that would be ideal. There are smaller and lighter DSLRs not far off that but nothing even vaguely on a par with the best prosumer or professional models.

If part of the reason is the myriad features then, as I said before, few are really necessary or useful. If for example, one values face recognition, then I maintain that the owner is not a photographer but a snapshotter who owns a camera.

I regret that DP Review aims to include such people in its audience. It started off on a different footing but now anything goes.

Direct link | Posted on Dec 20, 2011 at 18:03 UTC
Total: 154, showing: 121 – 140
« First‹ Previous5678Next ›Last »